Request for Feedback on My Exceptional Promise Document Plan

Stage 1
1

Dear community, I would appreciate your feedback on my planned set of supporting documents for my Exceptional Promise application. Below is a brief overview of my background and a summary of each document I intend to submit, including its assigned eligibility criterion.

About Me

I am a founder and CEO of a digital technology company, as well as a co-founder of a second tech venture. Over the past few years, I have launched several SaaS and AI-based digital products in the insurance sector. These solutions are used internationally and have generated early commercial traction, including signed clients, revenue, and investor interest. I have also been an active speaker at several industry events across Europe and contributed to international tech publications.

Mandatory Criteria

  1. Leadership in Building a Digital Tech Company
    Description: Demonstrates my formal role as co-founder and director of a tech company, including proof of registration and my contributions to strategy, product direction, and early-stage growth.

  2. Speaking Engagements Proof
    Description: Visual evidence and summaries from 5 international digital tech conferences where I was invited to speak on innovation in digital distribution and client engagement.

  3. Publications and Media Recognition
    Description: Screenshots and links to published interviews and expert commentary in international tech and business magazines (not self-published).

  4. Company Transformation Overview
    Description: Demonstrates how I led the strategic shift of an existing service company into a product-focused digital technology business, including the creation of a product portfolio and early market validation.

Optional Criteria 1 — Innovation

  1. Innovation and Market Traction of a SaaS Platform
    Description: Overview of a low-code platform I co-created, with a focus on its technical differentiators, global adoption, and external recognition by industry research firms.

  2. AI-Based Product Overview
    Description: Presentation of a solution integrating machine learning into underwriting automation, including its architecture, innovation layer, and application scope.

  3. Mobile-Based Super App Overview
    Description: Summary of an AI-powered mobile application that connects users to insurance, health, and finance services, with UX innovations and API-based integrations.

Optional Criteria 3 — Significant Commercial Contribution

  1. Financial Growth Strategy
    Description: Three-year roadmap for scaling revenue, client base, and international expansion across multiple product lines, developed as part of my founder responsibilities.

  2. Commercial Success of SaaS Platform
    Description: Evidence of early traction (ARR, client growth, investment), showing business performance for a SaaS product I launched as a co-founder.

  3. Direct Engagement and Signed Clients
    Description: Screenshots and descriptions of personally led client interactions and signed contracts for our tech products, including CRM records, email outreach, and sales pipeline ownership.

I’d love your honest feedback on the structure, balance between criteria, and relevance of these documents.
Any thoughts on how to strengthen the submission — especially in terms of matching Tech Nation expectations — would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks in advance to anyone who takes the time to review.

2

Hi @Ilya_Pinchuk

Good set!

In MC.1 please also add any audited financial records and investment details if applicable.
MC.2 please include attendee size and thank you letter from 1 organsier if possible

OC1: what’s the third party validation for all these evidences?

OC3.1: roadmap does not equal commercial success which is asked in the criteria.

Need to showcase your contribution to specific quantified company metrics. What is the third party evidence in all these?

Would be good to add 1 reference letter each across all criteria.

3

Thank you very much for your thoughtful feedback — I greatly appreciate it.

I will definitely update MC.1 with audited financial data and investment details, and for MC.2 I will add audience size and a thank-you note from one of the organisers.

May I please ask for some clarification on the following points:

OC1 — Third-party validation:
You mentioned the need for third-party validation of innovation evidence. Would expert letters from partners who adopted the product and confirmed its innovative nature be considered acceptable? Would mentions in rankings (e.g. “Top 5 Risk Management Products”), media features, or partnerships with known organisations also qualify?

OC3.1 — Commercial success vs. roadmap:
I understand that a roadmap alone is not sufficient. I do have product-specific financial results (ARR, revenue forecasts, market traction) and client statements referencing revenue growth. Could you kindly advise what would be considered strong third-party evidence to support “significant commercial contribution” for OC3?

Reference letters across criteria:
Also, just to clarify — when you suggested adding “one reference letter each across all criteria”, did you mean these should be in addition to the three mandatory Letters of Recommendation? If so, would these be counted within the 10 allowed evidence documents? I ask because including three more letters as part of the evidence would require significant restructuring of my submission plan, and I want to ensure I interpret this correctly.

Thank you again for your time and advice.

4

Why are you applying for exceptional promise? How many years of experience do you have?

1 Like
5

I am applying under the Exceptional Promise route because, although I have 17 years of experience in digital technology, the first 10 years of my career were primarily focused on the service business model. Over the past few years, I have shifted my focus toward building product-led digital technology companies with international reach.

Most of my achievements that align with Tech Nation’s criteria — such as launching innovative SaaS platforms, driving AI product development, securing international partnerships, and gaining external recognition — have been achieved in the last 3–5 years. The Exceptional Promise route best reflects this transition and my rapidly growing impact in the global tech ecosystem.

6

Exceptional promise is for applicants with under 5 years of experience. Your experience clearly fits the Exceptional talent route.

7

The purpose of the validation is to attribute the product/result/innovation to you as an individual. Think of it from a devil’s advocate pov - what makes someone believe that these are in fact your creation or output that came out of your leadership? Rankings on highly credible and competitive sites would help - but again attribution to you (such as mentions of your name) is key.

Financial results are ok but you’ve put it in context to how significant it was in your market. Comparison to baselines are also helpful. But forecasts won’t count as results.

did you mean these should be in addition to the three mandatory Letters of Recommendation? If so, would these be counted within the 10 allowed evidence documents?

Yes - that would mean 3 LORs and 3 ref letters. You can still work out the real estate within the 3 page limit under each evidence doc (applies to the ref letter as well) in order to accommodate the additional letter.

Hope this helps.

8

Thank you very much for your detailed and thoughtful response — it is greatly appreciated.

To clarify my situation: I previously applied under the Exceptional Talent route, but my application was not endorsed. In the most recent feedback from Tech Nation (29 May 2024), the panel raised several concerns, notably around attribution and validation of impact. For example, they stated:

“The candidate has not shown he has been recognised as a leading talent in the digital technology sector in the last five years.”
“Much of this evidence is self-certified by the candidate without external third-party support.”
“The candidate’s media recognition and registration of a company are not sufficient.”

In response to this, I considered applying under the Exceptional Promise route, because I believed that my current application would better reflect the trajectory of my work and potential — especially as much of my shift into product-led innovation happened in the last 3–5 years.

I now understand from your message that Exceptional Promise is strictly for applicants with under 5 years of experience, and I fully respect that. I will therefore prepare my next application under the Exceptional Talent route again.

That said, I would like to share a bit of context:
My focus has always been on building and delivering high-quality digital products with real impact. While I may not have received press awards or public media coverage highlighting me individually, the results of my work are evident through:

  • adoption by international clients (including enterprise-level insurers),
  • revenue impact,
  • strong feedback from strategic partners and stakeholders who worked directly with me.

As we advance, I will structure my evidence to strengthen attribution — through reference letters embedded in evidence documents, testimonials, signed contracts, and documented product involvement — even if I do not have public rankings or mass-media validation. My focus remains on substance and results, not just visibility.

Would it be acceptable to briefly acknowledge this context in my personal statement — that I am reapplying under Exceptional Talent with a more targeted approach based on prior panel feedback?

Thank you again for your invaluable support and clarity.

9

You don’t need to mention about your previous application in your personal statement.

From the feedback it looks like most of your application was self-claims. Hence you need more validating evidences to prove what you are saying is accurate and attributed to you.

10

Thank you — that’s helpful to know regarding the personal statement.

As for the validating evidence: I understand the panel’s concern about self-claims, and I’d really appreciate your advice here. Could you please share some specific examples of what would be considered strong validating evidence to prove that the products, innovations, and commercial outcomes are directly attributable to me?

For example:

  • Would detailed client testimonials or emails confirming my role in the product strategy or delivery count?
  • Would product documentation with my authorship, meeting notes, or Slack screenshots showing my decisions be valid?
  • Would adding contracts or pitch decks with my name as the lead or founder help establish attribution?

Any guidance on what types of evidence are most persuasive would be very helpful — I want to ensure the revised application is as clear and credible as possible.

Thank you again!

11

Contracts, client testimonials (from high authority in the client’s company), announcements about your launches, code push logs or messages, tickets - all of these have more than just you involved/mentioned and hence would add to the credibility. Slack messages can’t be used as standalone evidence for a certain claim but if there’s parts that are critically validated on Slack, you may still add at the bottom. But I’d keep it at the bottom of the pile.

12

Thank you for the helpful breakdown.

I have a related question about income/salary evidence. I am both the founder and director of my own company. In this case, I am unsure whether salary confirmation documents issued by my company (and signed by me or my accountant) would be accepted as credible evidence.

  1. Is it necessary to include salary/income proof at all?
  2. If so, what kind of evidence would be considered reliable in the case of a founder?
  • Tax declarations from the national tax authority?
  • Company bank statements?
  • Certificate from the company’s accountant?

I’m concerned that self-issued certificates may be viewed as biased or insufficient

13

Salary document is anyway the weakest evidence and considered just a backing support. You should focus on consolidating other documents which help you clear the criteria irrespective of the salary doc.

As a founder, company registration, audited financial record, equity shareholding, investment proof is better.

14

Looking at your planned documents, you have a good foundation. However, I suggest applying to Talent over Promise as suggested by others. I’d recommend strengthening your Optional Criteria 1 section by adding more third-party validation. For your AI and mobile products, include testimonials from clients or industry experts who can verify their innovative nature. Tech Nation particularly values external recognition rather than self-descriptions of innovation.

Consider consolidating some of your evidence to stay within the 10-document limit. For example, combine related speaking engagements into one document with a clear explanation of how they demonstrate your expertise. Also, make sure each document begins with a concise summary explaining how it specifically meets the criteria requirements before presenting the evidence itself.

1 Like